namespaces discussions off-topic (was Re: [uf-discuss] changing abbr-design-pattern to title-design-pattern?)
On 4/30/07 6:20 PM, James Craig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: but this battle has been fought and lost before. If you want to mount another advance, my +1 will be right behind you, but my morale in the fight will not be very high. The target is very well-entrenched. Namespaced content on the Web has failed. This has nothing to do with any entrenchment. It's just the sad reality of namespaces. They suck in practice, and no amount of theoretical worship (+1ing etc.) will change that. It's been tried by numerous groups, before microformats, and after. It's even been tried in the context of RSS and RDF, and in practice people write scrapers that look for namespace prefixes as if they are part of the element name, not as mere shorthands for namespace URIs. If you want to carry on a theoretical discussion of namespaces, please do so elsewhere, for in practice, discussing them is a waste of time, and off-topic for microformats lists. Tantek ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: namespaces discussions off-topic (was Re: [uf-discuss] changing abbr-design-pattern to title-design-pattern?)
On 01/05/2007 07:26, Tantek Çelik wrote: It's been tried by numerous groups, before microformats, and after. It's even been tried in the context of RSS and RDF, and in practice people write scrapers that look for namespace prefixes as if they are part of the element name, not as mere shorthands for namespace URIs. Isn't this a narrow view of namespaces, i.e. the XML viewpoint. There are many types of non-URI/QName namespacing mechanisms such as Java package name conventions, Perl module conventions etc. Are those offtopic too? If you want to carry on a theoretical discussion of namespaces, please do so elsewhere, for in practice, discussing them is a waste of time, and off-topic for microformats lists. Apologies for this post. If the answer to the above is yes then this will be the last from me on this topic. Ian ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: namespaces discussions off-topic (was Re: [uf-discuss] changing abbr-design-pattern to title-design-pattern?)
On 5/1/07 1:01 AM, Ian Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 01/05/2007 07:26, Tantek Çelik wrote: It's been tried by numerous groups, before microformats, and after. It's even been tried in the context of RSS and RDF, and in practice people write scrapers that look for namespace prefixes as if they are part of the element name, not as mere shorthands for namespace URIs. Isn't this a narrow view of namespaces, i.e. the XML viewpoint. There are many types of non-URI/QName namespacing mechanisms such as Java package name conventions, Perl module conventions etc. Are those offtopic too? This is why I precisely said (in the paragraph that was not quoted), with emphasis added: Namespaced **content** on the Web has failed. AFAIK, Java package name conventions, Perl module conventions are *not* considered *content* that is served on the web. They're code. And they're not served, they're executed server-side. Namespaced **content** has failed because it encourages proprietary siloization of data, rather than interoperability. Namespaces perform a very different function in code (with different needs), despite the cosmetic similarities (use of : etc.). If you want to carry on a theoretical discussion of namespaces, please do so elsewhere, for in practice, discussing them is a waste of time, and off-topic for microformats lists. Apologies for this post. If the answer to the above is yes then this will be the last from me on this topic. Why would a discussion of namespaced *code* be *on* topic? How is it relevant to microformats? At a minimum, it would be more appropriate for the microformats-dev list than the microformats-discuss list, but even then I fail to see how it is germane to the domain. Tantek ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: namespaces discussions off-topic (was Re: [uf-discuss] changing abbr-design-pattern to title-design-pattern?)
Hello Tantek, I think Ian may have meant... what about using (for Microformats) namespaces with pre-defined (and never changing) namespace prefixes (like in Java and Perl), instead of variable namespace prefixes (like in XML). See ya On 5/1/07, Tantek Çelik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 5/1/07 1:01 AM, Ian Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 01/05/2007 07:26, Tantek Çelik wrote: It's been tried by numerous groups, before microformats, and after. It's even been tried in the context of RSS and RDF, and in practice people write scrapers that look for namespace prefixes as if they are part of the element name, not as mere shorthands for namespace URIs. Isn't this a narrow view of namespaces, i.e. the XML viewpoint. There are many types of non-URI/QName namespacing mechanisms such as Java package name conventions, Perl module conventions etc. Are those offtopic too? This is why I precisely said (in the paragraph that was not quoted), with emphasis added: Namespaced **content** on the Web has failed. AFAIK, Java package name conventions, Perl module conventions are *not* considered *content* that is served on the web. They're code. And they're not served, they're executed server-side. Namespaced **content** has failed because it encourages proprietary siloization of data, rather than interoperability. Namespaces perform a very different function in code (with different needs), despite the cosmetic similarities (use of : etc.). If you want to carry on a theoretical discussion of namespaces, please do so elsewhere, for in practice, discussing them is a waste of time, and off-topic for microformats lists. Apologies for this post. If the answer to the above is yes then this will be the last from me on this topic. Why would a discussion of namespaced *code* be *on* topic? How is it relevant to microformats? At a minimum, it would be more appropriate for the microformats-dev list than the microformats-discuss list, but even then I fail to see how it is germane to the domain. Tantek -- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. charles @ reptile.ca supercanadian @ gmail.com developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/ ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: namespaces discussions off-topic (was Re: [uf-discuss] changing abbr-design-pattern to title-design-pattern?)
On 5/1/07 9:03 AM, Charles Iliya Krempeaux [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello Tantek, I think Ian may have meant... what about using (for Microformats) namespaces with pre-defined (and never changing) namespace prefixes (like in Java and Perl), instead of variable namespace prefixes (like in XML). Even fixed namespace prefixes on content have the siloization/balkanization effects and are thus undesirable. Tantek ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: namespaces discussions off-topic (was Re: [uf-discuss] changing abbr-design-pattern to title-design-pattern?)
Tantek Çelik wrote: If you want to carry on a theoretical discussion of namespaces, please do so elsewhere, for in practice, discussing them is a waste of time, and off-topic for microformats lists. Namespacing is not off-topic for Microformats. Note the hAudio proposal. http://microformats.org/wiki/grouping-brainstorming#Option_. 233:_Explicit_class-based_grouping div class=haudio grouping.today-podcast.810-interview div class=haudio grouping.today-podcast.the-today-lead-interviews ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: namespaces discussions off-topic (was Re: [uf-discuss] changing abbr-design-pattern to title-design-pattern?)
On 01/05/2007 17:03, Charles Iliya Krempeaux wrote: Hello Tantek, I think Ian may have meant... what about using (for Microformats) namespaces with pre-defined (and never changing) namespace prefixes (like in Java and Perl), instead of variable namespace prefixes (like in XML). Yes. Of course I understand the distinction between code and content. But I suggested Java and Perl practices as illustrations of conventions for namespacing things. I'm interested in looking at patterns of naming that may allow more decentralised collaboration. Ian ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: namespaces discussions off-topic (was Re: [uf-discuss] changing abbr-design-pattern to title-design-pattern?)
Ian Davis wrote: On 01/05/2007 17:03, Charles Iliya Krempeaux wrote: Hello Tantek, I think Ian may have meant... what about using (for Microformats) namespaces with pre-defined (and never changing) namespace prefixes (like in Java and Perl), instead of variable namespace prefixes (like in XML). Yes. Of course I understand the distinction between code and content. But I suggested Java and Perl practices as illustrations of conventions for namespacing things. I'm interested in looking at patterns of naming that may allow more decentralised collaboration. I would also be good to ressurect the page called NamespacesChickenLittling, of which I can see no trace but is referred to in vote-links-faq i.e. For followup QA about VoteLinks and namespaces, see NamespacesChickenLittling. this could probably cover the hAudio namespace useage also. Tim p.s. I'm not sure namespaces can be said to have failed when http://microformats.org has two of them.. ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: namespaces discussions off-topic (was Re: [uf-discuss] changing abbr-design-pattern to title-design-pattern?)
On 5/1/07 11:26 AM, James Craig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Tantek Çelik wrote: If you want to carry on a theoretical discussion of namespaces, please do so elsewhere, for in practice, discussing them is a waste of time, and off-topic for microformats lists. Namespacing is not off-topic for Microformats. Note the hAudio proposal. http://microformats.org/wiki/grouping-brainstorming#Option_. 233:_Explicit_class-based_grouping div class=haudio grouping.today-podcast.810-interview div class=haudio grouping.today-podcast.the-today-lead-interviews That is sufficient reason to reject the proposal. Thanks for bringing it to the attention of the list. In addition, that markup example places content in the class attribute which is also unacceptable. Tantek ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
